ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT
No. CR 93-189
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION
STATE OF ARKANSAS
Opinion Delivered October 12, 2006
PRO SE PETITION TO REINVEST
JURISDICTION IN THE TRIAL
COURT TO CONSIDER A PETITION
FOR WRIT OF ERROR CORAM NOBIS
[CIRCUIT COURT OF DALLAS
COUNTY, CR 90-16]
In 1992, a jury found petitioner Reginald Early guilty of aggravated robbery and murder in
the first degree and sentenced him to life imprisonment in the Arkansas Department of Correction.
This court affirmed the judgment. Early v. State, 315 Ark. 466, 869 S.W.2d 9 (1994). Petitioner
filed in the trial court a petition for postconviction relief under Ark. R. Crim. P. 37.1, which was not
timely. Following the trial court’s denial of that petition, this court denied petitioner’s request to
proceed with an appeal because the petition was untimely. Early v. State, CR 99-1113 (Ark.
November 18, 1999) (per curiam). In 2004, petitioner filed a pro se petition in this court to reinvest
jurisdiction in the trial court to consider a petition for writ of error coram nobis, which was denied.
Early v. State, CR 93-189 (Ark. November 18, 2004) (per curiam).
Once again, petitioner, proceeding pro se, requests this court to reinvest jurisdiction in the
For clerical purposes, the instant petition to reinvest jurisdiction in the trial court to consider
a petition for writ of error coram nobis was assigned the same docket number as the direct appeal
of the judgment.
trial court to consider a petition for writ of error coram nobis. The petition for leave to proceed in
the trial court is necessary because the circuit court can entertain a petition for writ of error coram
nobis after a judgment has been affirmed on appeal only after we grant permission. Dansby v. State,
343 Ark. 635, 37 S.W.3d 599 (2001) (per curiam). In this latest petition, petitioner asserts that the
trial court should be reinvested with jurisdiction to consider a petition for the writ